Homicide Law

Question 1

Murray Wright Ltd

Answer 1

Because the killing must be done by a human being, an organisation such as a hospital or food company cannot be convicted as a principal offender

Question 2

What are the three main types of culpable homicide?

Answer 2

Murder, manslaughter and infanticide

Question 3

What is the difference between murder and manslaughter?

Answer 3

The critical distinction between murder and manslaughter is whether the offender intended to kill the deceased or to harm them in a way they knew might result in death

Question 4

To establish a death, you must prove the;

Answer 4

• death occured
• deceased is identified as the person who has been killed
• the killing is culpable

Question 5

Associated murder charges include;

Answer 5

• attempt to murder
• counselling or attempting to procure murder
• conspiracy to murder
• accessory after the fact to murder

Question 6

What are the two types of automatism?

Answer 6

The two types of automatism are sane and insane

Question 7

What type of defence does a child under 10 years have?

Answer 7

A child under 10 years has an absolute defence

Question 8

What in effect is a defence of mistake?

Answer 8

A defence of mistake is in effect a denial of intent

Question 9

What is compulsion?

Answer 9

Compulsion is the act of compelling a person to do something against their will

Question 10

When does a child become a human being?

Answer 10

A child is a human being when it is completely proceeded in a living state away from the body of its mother whether or not it is breathing/not breathing, has independent circulation or not, the navel string is severed or not

Question 11

Define killing of a child (section 159)

Answer 11

The killing of a child is homicide if it dies in consequence of injuries received before, during or after birth

Question 12

Define culpable homicide?

Answer 12

When the killing is blameworthy. Includes murder, manslaughter or infanticide

Question 13

Define homicide

Answer 13

Homicide is the killing of a human being by another, directly or indirectly by any means whatsoever

Question 14

Can an organisation be charged with Manslaughter?

Answer 14

Not as a principal offender. An organisation can be convicted as a party to the offence (section 66(1))

Question 15

R V Myatt

Answer 15

Before a breach of any act, regulation or bylaw would be an unlawful act under S160 for the purpose of a culpable homicide it must be an act likely to do harm to the deceased or to some class of person of whom he was one

Question 16

R v Lee

Answer 16

Act must be objectively dangerous where a reasonable person knows the risk of the harm existed

Question 17

R v Tomars

Answer 17

Formulates in the following way;
1. Was the deceased threatened, in fear of or deceived by the defendant
2. Did the threats/fear/deception cause the deceased to do the act resulting in their death
3. Was the act a natural consequence of the defendant’s actions, in that any reasonable person would have seen the foreseeable consequence
4. Did the foreseeable action of the victim contribute in a way to his death

Question 18

Can someone consent to their death?

Answer 18

No-one has the right to consent to being killed (s63). This means if someone is killed, the fact they gave their consent will not affect the criminal responsibility of anyone else involved in the killing

Question 19

Proof of death

Answer 19

To establish the death, you must prove the

• death occurred
• deceased is identified as the person who has been killed
• the killing is culpable

Death can be proved by direct and/or circumstantial evidence

Question 20

R v Harpur

Answer 20

Conduct viewed cumulatively up to the point when the conduct in question stops. Defendant’s conduct may be considered in its entirety

Question 21

Counselling or attempting to procure murder

Answer 21

Anyone who incites, counsels or attempts to procure any person to murder any other person in New Zealand when the murder is not in fact committed

Question 22

Conspiracy to murder

Answer 22

(1) Anyone who conspires or agrees with any person to murder any other person whether the murder is to take place in New Zealand or elsewhere

(2) The expression to murder includes to cause the death of another person out of New Zealand in circumstances that would amount to murder if the act were committed in New Zealand

Regardless of whether the murder is committed or not

Question 23

R v Mane

Answer 23

To be considered an accessory the acts done by the person must be after the completion of the offence eg. Homicide

Question 24

Involuntary manslaughter

Answer 24

An unlawful killing in which the death is caused by an unlawful act or gross negligence

Question 25

Voluntary manslaughter

Answer 25

A death caused by mitigating circumstances eg suicide pact. Considered manslaughter even though the defendant may have intended to kill or cause GBH

Question 26

R v Blaue

Answer 26

Those who use violence must take their victims as they find them

Question 27

R v Piri

Answer 27

Recklessness involves a conscious and deliberate risk taking. The accused must recognise a “real or substantial risk” that death would be caused

Question 28

R v Murphy

Answer 28

When proving an attempt to commit an offence it must be shown that the accused’s intent was to commit the substantive offence. Eg attempted murder it is necessary for the crown to establish an actual intent to kill

Question 29

R v Cottle

Answer 29

As to degree of proof, it is sufficient if the plea is established to the Satisfaction of the jury on a preponderance of probabilities without necessarily excluding all reasonable doubt

Question 30

R v Lavelle

Answer 30

It is permissible for undercover officers to merely provide the opportunity for someone who is ready and willing to offend, as long as the officers did not initiate the person’s interest or willingness to so offend

Question 31

R v Joyce

Answer 31

Court of Appeal decided that compulsion must be made by a person who is present when the offence is committed

Question 32

R v Codere

Answer 32

The nature and quality of the act means the character of the act. Doesn’t include the accused’s moral perception not knowledge of the moral quality of the act

Question 33

R v Clark

Answer 33

The decision as to an accused’s insanity is always for the jury and a verdict inconsistent with medical evidence is not necessarily unreasonable. Where unchallenged is supported by surrounding facts